Lewisville, Flower Mound bills may get second chance in Texas Legislature

1/1

File 2012/Staff Photo

Lewisville wants a say in the expansion of the Camelot Landfill, on its southern border but owned by Farmers Branch. Proposed legislation that died in the regular session would have given it that voice.

Several bills that were being watched by Lewisville and Flower Mound residents failed to gain approval before the clock ran out on the 83rd legislative session.

Some may gain new life if Gov. Rick Perry opens up the 30-day special session to legislative issues other than redistricting.

A proposal that would have made it harder to expand the Camelot Landfill on Lewisville’s southern border with Carrollton never made it to a vote in the Environmental Regulations Committee.

“I’m very disappointed,” said Rep. Ron Simmons, R-Carrollton, who wrote the bill to give affected cities a voice in landfill expansions.

Farmers Branch owns Camelot Landfill. Officials there say it needs to be increased to accommodate growth.

Lewisville and Carrollton are fighting the expansion permit request pending before the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

Lewisville officials contend that Farmers Branch must obtain a specific-use permit to expand the landfill. Farmers Branch officials say such a permit is not required under current law.

Simmons’ bill would have prohibited TCEQ from issuing an expansion permit without the approval of the city where the landfill is located.

If Perry opens up the special session, Simmons said, he will refile the bill.

Development district

Several pieces of legislation of interest to Flower Mound residents also stalled.

One would have created a special-use district to spur development of the River Walk in Central Park. The mixed-use project has languished since its original developer fell into default.

A new developer, Mehrdad Moayedi, president of Centurion American, came forward earlier this year with plans to resurrect the project with additional improvements.

He sought a municipal management district that would assess fees on property owners within the district to pay for infrastructure. That would free up development money for additional amenities and reduce the number of apartment units, Moayedi said.

The bill by Rep. Tan Parker, R–Flower Mound, was passed by the House but never made it out of a Senate committee.

“This will definitely impact the project,” Moayedi said Friday. Without the municipal management district, the amenities, such as public art and a bell tower, can’t be added and the residential density would increase, he said.

Moayedi plans to address the Flower Mound Town Council on Monday. He may seek other options, such as creation of a Public Improvement District, which would require voter approval.

Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, filed a bill that would have required gas utility companies to give residents five days notice before coming on their property to access easements.

Nelson introduced the bill after Atmos Energy announced plans to remove trees in a 12-mile stretch along its right of way through Flower Mound.

In recent months, the company has worked with the town on a tree survey and has agreed to contact residents before cutting trees on their property.

Squatters

Another Nelson bill would have made it harder for squatters to lay claim to vacant or foreclosed homes under an archaic “adverse possession” law.

In 2011, Kenneth T. Robinson moved into a foreclosed $340,000 Flower Mound home after paying a $16 fee to file an affidavit of adverse possession.

His action sparked outcry as well as a flurry of house squatting in North Texas.

Robinson was later ordered to vacate the property, and other squatters were charged with trespassing, theft and burglary.

Nelson’s bill was passed by the Senate but never made it to a House vote. It would have prohibited such an affidavit from being recorded without proof that proper notice had been given to anyone with a legitimate interest in the property.

To post a comment, log into your chosen social network and then add your comment below. Your comments are subject to our Terms of Service and the privacy policy and terms of service of your social network. If you do not want to comment with a social network, please consider writing a letter to the editor.